About your Search

20120930
20121008
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
be excused for paying any income taxes. >> but he said that's totally wrong. >> let me get to that. the top 47% make more than $250,000 a year and pay more income taxes. he was wrong by saying 47%. he was right in saying 47% don't pay income taxes. you talk about lifting those people up so they can make it in america. that's what they want. they want to become taxpayers, and that's where he was totally wrong and tonal deaf. that's why i said that night, they're not victims. >> but his response right now is saying he was dplecompletely wr which is different than what he said earlier, saying he stated it ineloquently. >> i think what he was saying is he was completely wrong in speaking pejoratively of the 47%, and he was wrong to do that. he is wrong about the basic economics of our country. but we have gotten to a point where the country is paying no income taxes and takg advantage of the role of government. does that mean too high, too low? that's a good argument to get into. >> i'm utterly confused right now. >> you're only confused because he's trying to explain the comment from mitt romn
is thinking about a plan which would lower regulations, which would change the tax, which would drive an energy policy that's very aggressive. i don't know if he's going to get 12. i'm not a romney surrogate. i'm not in the campaign. i have never talked to the campaign. i have nothing to do with romney. i just believe this number shouldot determine the outcome of the presidential election. did you see today -- >> i agree with you. jack, you're a hero to business people in this country. you're a hero to all sorts of people. just do it now. do it. i can go back to loving you and you can go back to loving me. just do it now and say it's not right what you said. nobody cooked the books. you don't truly believe that, do you? >> i said i should have put a question mark at the back of it. >> would you argue that you were being provocative and had you put a question mark it would have been seen as more of a provocative statement rather than factual -- >> it would have been a better statement. there's no question. i put a question mark. look at my tweet last night. i looked -- go look at the t
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)